Considerations for the design, analysis and presentation of in vivo studies.

OBJECTIVE: To describe, explain and give practical suggestions regarding important principles and key methodological challenges in the study design, statistical analysis, and reporting of results from in vivo studies. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-specifying endpoints and analysis, recognizing the common underlying assumption of statistically independent observations, performing sample size calculations, and addressing multiplicity issues are important parts of an in vivo study. A clear reporting of results and informative graphical presentations of data are other important parts.

OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Key analytic considerations in design, analysis, and reporting of randomized controlled trials in osteoarthritis.

To highlight methodologic challenges pertinent to design, analysis, and reporting of results of randomized clinical trials in OA and offer practical suggestions to overcome these challenges. The topics covered in this paper include subject selection, randomization, approaches to handling missing data, subgroup analysis, sample size, and issues related to changing design mid-way through the study. Special attention is given to standardizing the reporting of results and economic analyses. Key findings include the importance of blinding and concealment, the distinction between superiority and non-inferiority trials, the need to minimize missing data, and appropriate analysis and interpretation of subgroup effects. Investigators may use the findings and recommendations advanced in this paper to guide design and conduct of randomized controlled trials of interventions for osteoarthritis.

An examination of the effect of different methods of scoring pain after a total knee replacement on the number of patients who report unchanged or worse pain.

We identified a group of patients from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register who reported no relief of pain or worse pain one year after a total knee replacement (TKR). A total of two different patient-reported pain scores were used during this process. We then evaluated how the instruments used to measure pain affected the number of patients who reported no relief of pain or worse pain, and the relative effect of potential risk factors. Between 2008 and 2010, 2883 TKRs were performed for osteoarthritis in two Swedish arthroplasty units. After applying exclusion criteria, 2123 primary TKRs (2123 patients) were included in the study. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for knee pain were used to assess patients pre-operatively and one year post-operatively. Only 50 of the 220 patients (23%) who reported no pain relief on either the KOOS pain subscale or the VAS for knee pain did so with both of these instruments. Patients who reported no pain relief on either measure tended to have less pain pre-operatively but a higher degree of anxiety. Charnley category C was a predictor for not gaining pain relief as measured on a VAS for knee pain. The number of patients who are not relieved of pain after a TKR differs considerably depending on the instrument used to measure pain.

The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register: a review.

We are entering a new era with governmental bodies taking an increasingly guiding role, gaining control of registries, demanding direct access with release of open public information for quality comparisons between hospitals. This review is written by physicians and scientists who have worked with the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (SKAR) periodically since it began. It reviews the history of the register and describes the methods used and lessons learned. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:217-22.

Why the P-value culture is bad and confidence intervals a better alternative.

In spite of frequent discussions of misuse and misunderstanding of probability values (P-values) they still appear in most scientific publications, and the disadvantages of erroneous and simplistic P-value interpretations grow with the number of scientific publications. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage prefer confidence intervals. This is a brief discussion of problems surrounding P-values and confidence intervals.

Can sulphonylurea addition to lifestyle changes help to delay diabetes development in subjects with impaired fasting glucose? The Nepi ANtidiabetes StudY (NANSY).

The Nepi ANtidiabetes StudY (NANSY) is a 5-year randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Swedish primary care, examining whether the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and retinopathy (separately reported) would be delayed in 40- to 70-year-old subjects with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) who, in addition to lifestyle changes, were treated with either placebo or low-dosage sulphonylurea (SU) (1-mg glimepiride; Amaryl). Of 274 subjects (163 men, 111 women), 138 were allocated to placebo (46.0% men, 56.8% women) and 136 to glimepiride (54.0% men, 43.2% women). The primary endpoint was conversion to diabetes. Average follow-up time was 3.71 years; 96 subjects converted to diabetes, 55 allocated to placebo and 41 to glimepiride (absolute difference 9.8%; p = 0.072). In conclusion, the study failed to support the notion that low-dose SU added to lifestyle changes in IFG subjects would help to delay the conversion to diabetes.